“Cell tower and a perfect blue sky in the background” by Ivan Radic is licensed under CC BY 2.0.

The Sitka Assembly periodically convenes as a Board of Adjustment to hear zoning appeals as a quasi-judicial body. At its meeting on May 29, the group was set to hear an appeal from Tidal Network, the telecommunications service run by the Central Council of Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska. Tidal Network applied for a height variance in the Nancy Court area to install a 120 foot tall cellular tower, which it says will address a significant wireless coverage gap in the area.

It’s controversial for a variety of reasons, as neighbor Hal Spackman said during public comment.  

“120 foot high cell tower on a landslide zone behind a bunch of houses with kids? Maybe it doesn’t bother us at all. Maybe it can lead to serious health effects of little children later in their lives. I don’t know,” said Spackman. “When you see a bad idea, you know it.”

In April, the Planning Commission heard a number of those concerns– that the tower would have an impact on property values, that it would increase landslide risk in the area, and some worries about potential health risks. The Commission unanimously denied the variance request and Tidal Network filed an appeal, bumping the issue to the assembly table.

But when it came time for the assembly to consider the appeal, one by one assembly members disclosed conflicts- the mayor lives in the neighborhood, and some assembly members had communicated with community members who voiced concerns about the tower.

Vice Deputy Mayor JJ Carlson explained what the recusal of four assembly members meant for the appeal.

“So for those that haven’t been keeping score, we are at two members of the board of adjustment. We currently are outweighed at the table here by staff. And in order to address this agenda item, we have to make quorum,” Carlson said. “So we are not able to proceed with this.” 

Normally, an assembly member discussing an issue with a member of the public ahead of a meeting wouldn’t be a big deal– as elected officials, it’s part of their role to hear concerns and have those conversations. But when the assembly is acting as the Board of Adjustment, assembly member Thor Christianson said not disclosing ex parte communication could jeopardize the case. 

“The bar is much higher when we’re sitting as a Board of Adjustment or something like that, than when we’re just as an assembly member,” Christianson said. “So I apologize if you came down and you’re not able to really address this, but I think the outcome is much better than the alternative.” 

So what now? Rachel Jones said the appeal will be considered by the State Office of Administrative Hearings. The appeal will be rescheduled with that office, and the process will be the same. That’s the last step before court. 

“Everything that can be done administratively had been done, and if the party who does not like that outcome still doesn’t like it, they would have a right to appeal to Superior Court here in Sitka,” Jones said. “And because there’s federal issues involved, possibly district court, Federal District Court in Anchorage.”

But the assembly would have no further involvement in the decision. Mayor Steven Eisenbeisz said the situation was pretty unusual.

“I want to send my sincere thanks to those who came this evening with passions on either side of the issue. I apologize you weren’t able to present in the way that is normally functioning in this body,” Eisenbeisz said. “I’ve been sitting in multiple seats on this assembly for quite a few years now, and this is the first time that it’s ever happened to me where the entire body had to conflict themselves out. So thank you for your patience in this matter.” 

The assembly directed the city administrator to start the process with the State Office of Administrative Appeals. Jones said it would likely be a matter of weeks before the group scheduled a hearing.